If this is your first visit to the Roth Army, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I've read several stories on this from multiple media sources... Clearly some games and complex strategy are being played out. I thought this deal was off... then read the that Kim and Moon met face to face at the border again this morning and things sounded encouraging again.

Hard to say where this all lands... it's possible that the Korean war may finally be formally ended and the 2 countries make peace... or this whole thing blows up literally!! It just seems very odd the progression so far...

I've read several stories on this from multiple media sources... Clearly some games and complex strategy are being played out. I thought this deal was off... then read the that Kim and Moon met face to face at the border again this morning and things sounded encouraging again.

Hard to say where this all lands... it's possible that the Korean war may finally be formally ended and the 2 countries make peace... or this whole thing blows up literally!! It just seems very odd the progression so far...

It's a vivid illustration of Trump's manner that either of those polar opposites you mentioned as possible outcomes could literally happen.

Definitely not normal in terms of what we've been used to over the last 60 + years in terms of our relationship with North Korea. However, while I'd prefer that we had a person of a more stable temper in the Oval Office going into this summit, it also occurs to me that had it not been for Trump's saber rattling such a summit might not be happening to begin with: one doesn't easily picture Hillary Clinton threatening 'fire and fury' on North Korea had she been elected. More likely, she would have continued the previous policy of publicly ignoring the country while persisting in cyber disruption and sanctions, neither of which prevented North Korea from developing the weapons they have today.

Bottom line is Trump comes across as unstable enough to actually unleash the fire and fury, and maybe this realization of "hey, THIS American President might not be kidding" struck Kim Jon Un and prompted him to make moves toward some type of reconciliation, because even though Un is also a wack job I have no doubt he realizes that if North Korea launches missiles at the US, North Korea will be wiped off the face of the Earth. Getting Bolton in the Administration also may have sent a signal to Un that not only is Trump nuts, but now he is getting direct advice from a hawk nut who unabashedly advocates military intervention in North Korea, Iran and ANYWHERE ELSE that threatens America and American interests.

There is a mindset among some of the political class which states even sitting down to the table with North Korea is a mistake because even that simple act provides the legitimacy of nationhood that Un craves. Well, that might have made sense prior to the weapons program. Now, unless one is comfortable with the status quo of not talking with the North Koreans while they continue developing a nuclear arsenal, we've either got to hammer out an agreement with Un or be prepared to invade and destroy. I think we're past the stage where the traditional attitude of containment (sanctions, public avoidance of mentioning their name, burying our heads in the sand hoping it'll come out ok) will be a helpful one long term.

However, with Trump and Un as the principals, who the fuck KNOWS how this will turn out?

I've read several stories on this from multiple media sources... Clearly some games and complex strategy are being played out. I thought this deal was off... then read the that Kim and Moon met face to face at the border again this morning and things sounded encouraging again.

Hard to say where this all lands... it's possible that the Korean war may finally be formally ended and the 2 countries make peace... or this whole thing blows up literally!! It just seems very odd the progression so far...

I definitely think that Lil' Kim's mysterious train trip to Beijing last month had a lot to with it. North Korea stirring up shit ain't good for the Chinese either, and especially if a nuclear war ended up as a result, a big chunk of northeast China would end up damaged in the process. So it's likely that Xi Jingping summoned Lil' Kim to the big city and told him to get his shit together.

Not uncommon to have a party threaten to end negotiations. That's pretty normal if you've done any negotiating. If I'm negotiating a new lease with a tenant and the rent is going up it's not uncommon for them to threaten to move out. They are doing that to see if they can make me give them a better deal. It sometimes works and it sometimes doesn't. It's how the game is played.

Of course Cenk has his show to run and his money to make. Of course he's going to have some fun with Trump because that's what his viewers like. Here's a take on things from a different angle from someone who actually knew Donald Trump growing up.

It's a vivid illustration of Trump's manner that either of those polar opposites you mentioned as possible outcomes could literally happen.

Definitely not normal in terms of what we've been used to over the last 60 + years in terms of our relationship with North Korea. However, while I'd prefer that we had a person of a more stable temper in the Oval Office going into this summit, it also occurs to me that had it not been for Trump's saber rattling such a summit might not be happening to begin with: one doesn't easily picture Hillary Clinton threatening 'fire and fury' on North Korea had she been elected. More likely, she would have continued the previous policy of publicly ignoring the country while persisting in cyber disruption and sanctions, neither of which prevented North Korea from developing the weapons they have today.

Bottom line is Trump comes across as unstable enough to actually unleash the fire and fury, and maybe this realization of "hey, THIS American President might not be kidding" struck Kim Jon Un and prompted him to make moves toward some type of reconciliation, because even though Un is also a wack job I have no doubt he realizes that if North Korea launches missiles at the US, North Korea will be wiped off the face of the Earth. Getting Bolton in the Administration also may have sent a signal to Un that not only is Trump nuts, but now he is getting direct advice from a hawk nut who unabashedly advocates military intervention in North Korea, Iran and ANYWHERE ELSE that threatens America and American interests.

There is a mindset among some of the political class which states even sitting down to the table with North Korea is a mistake because even that simple act provides the legitimacy of nationhood that Un craves. Well, that might have made sense prior to the weapons program. Now, unless one is comfortable with the status quo of not talking with the North Koreans while they continue developing a nuclear arsenal, we've either got to hammer out an agreement with Un or be prepared to invade and destroy. I think we're past the stage where the traditional attitude of containment (sanctions, public avoidance of mentioning their name, burying our heads in the sand hoping it'll come out ok) will be a helpful one long term.

However, with Trump and Un as the principals, who the fuck KNOWS how this will turn out?

Trump consults Henry Kissinger and you can tell. Trump is running right from his own book and the Kissinger playbook. It's the madman strategy where you make your opponent think you are crazy enough to wipe them out. It at least has opened North Korea for discussions. The reality is North Korea's missles aren't very good and they have learned from past presidents all they have to do every now and then is throw a tantrum and they get what they want. Kim started to act up and Trump goes ok Rocket Man fill your hands! It shocked the shit out of Kim. He thought he would get more payoffs but I do think he wants to open his country up to trade but he also fears being taken out. He looks at places like Singapore which is ran by a dictator but it's economy is doing great. Kim probably dreams of North Korea being a Singapore with him running it but he doesn't want to end up like Omar Quadaffi or Saddam Hussain. I wouldn't trust the US either. I can't blame him for wanting a nuke. I would want one as well.

Trump consults Henry Kissinger and you can tell. Trump is running right from his own book and the Kissinger playbook. It's the madman strategy where you make your opponent think you are crazy enough to wipe them out. It at least has opened North Korea for discussions. The reality is North Korea's missles aren't very good and they have learned from past presidents all they have to do every now and then is throw a tantrum and they get what they want. Kim started to act up and Trump goes ok Rocket Man fill your hands! It shocked the shit out of Kim. He thought he would get more payoffs but I do think he wants to open his country up to trade but he also fears being taken out. He looks at places like Singapore which is ran by a dictator but it's economy is doing great. Kim probably dreams of North Korea being a Singapore with him running it but he doesn't want to end up like Omar Quadaffi or Saddam Hussain. I wouldn't trust the US either. I can't blame him for wanting a nuke. I would want one as well.

Yeah, for reasons that escape me, plenty of conservatives who have hawkish military inclinations (I include Hillary Clinton among them) have continued to seek advice from that aged, rumpled raisin of a man that Kissinger represents. Even when one discounts or avoids following into a Kissinger evisceration in the style of the late Christopher Hitchens, it is still fairly easy when removing and studying Kissinger's actual record of deeds from the amount of hyped media kudos surrounding the man to conclude that Kissinger in practice wasn't particularly successful. Far from an Oracle. Yet, Kissinger remains a go-to consultant on foreign affairs to this day.

I also thought at one point that Trump might be affecting a Madman Theory stance for the Supreme Leader of North Korea. Unlike Nixon, though, Trump is more of an impulsive or instinctual person. Whatever one may say about Nixon, he certainly had done his homework in terms of being somewhat informed. I tend to doubt that Trump even knows much about North Korea even in limited terms of the history of the country, the ruling family and the like. Nor does Trump strike me as the type of person who would rethink his emotional responses to dealing with North Korea - or any other problem, for that matter - in the face of learning information that ran counter to what his uninformed gut instincts told him the solution was.

Thus, with Trump, it isn't so much the Madman Bomber Theory as it is the Willfully Ignorant Man Who Thinks He Knows It All Anyway Theory.

The fact of the matter is while North Korea's missiles might not be very effective at the moment, they have nowhere to go but up as long as they keep developing their program. As long as they keep developing their program, American options for dealing with that will possibly whittle down to a sharp, binary set of choices:

1. We're going to accept that North Korea has a nuclear capability and recognize that we can't control that, because North Korea has been ostracized for decades thus the conditions that led to the Iranian Nuclear deal simply aren't there.

2. We're going to have to go in and use military force to either neuter or totally destroy the weapons program, along with possibly North Korea in the process.

And even if we accept the first option, we're still going to have to simultaneously be prepared to enact the second option if events unravel.

And, I must add, I agree with you that were I in Kim's shoes, I wouldn't trust the United States, either. I wouldn't disarm my nuclear capability strictly based on the promise from the US not to invade or attempt regime change.

Hillary Clinton wasn't a true liberal. She is basically a power and money addict. I think she actually loathed her voting base and her not being able to hide that fact is why she alienated the working class voters.

If a deal is made this will be the reality of it. Kim will stay in as a dictator but more like a dictator of a place like Singapore. He's not going to give his lifestyle up but he seems to want to do capitalistic styled business. He wants western things. He knows his country is backwards and he wants to modernize it. North Korea will still be highly regulated but if you are a go getter with the right contacts you can make a nice nest egg for yourself but the reality is many in the country will remain poor. Much like Putin's Russia.

Hillary Clinton wasn't a true liberal. She is basically a power and money addict. I think she actually loathed her voting base and her not being able to hide that fact is why she alienated the working class voters.

True, but working class voters have been feeling more and more alienated from the Democratic Party for decades, particularly white working class voters who resent identity politics being assigned a higher priority within the party than their own concerns (plenty of white working class voters - and not just a few who had previously voted democratic - voted for Reagan...twice). The Democratic Party has basically thrown their hands up in the face of technology and globalization, and had little to offer the white working class other than in essence saying to them as a demographic they are fucked.

And, it may well be true that as a demographic going forward the American white working class aren't going to have it as good as their parents did. The problem is, the Democratic Party is offering little other than to show the American white working class how to kneel. Trump (as opposed to the Establishment Republicans) offered a chance to stand tall and give a middle finger while doing so. In the end, Trump won't cure the conditions that will undermine the influence the shite working class in this country had. However, if death is inevitable, given the choice would you rather go out on your feet fighting, or on your knees crying? Not everyone asked that question would pick the same option. Trump gave the whites he was appealing to a valve to release the frustrations that had been building for decades. Before people had even heard of Trump OR the Clintons.

When Sanders spoke of HIS ambitions for the working class, working class people knew he was sincere. When Hillary did, working class people knew she was full of shit: you can't take $400k from Goldman for a speech you gave to them - and afterward fail to release the content of that speech - and be forced to consider a minimum wage higher than $11 only because your primary opponent was advocating for $15 and have any credibility with people making less than $100k a year. Particularly when you stack that on top of her husbands support of NAFTA, rescinding welfare benefits, and all the rest. The Democratic Party under the Clintons by and large sold out the working class years ago. Long before she ran for President the first time around in 2008.

What probably hurt the Democratic Party more than anything was using superdelegates to throw Bernie under the bus and give the nomination to Hillary. Notice Hillary won't go away either. It just proved the Democratic Party isn't so Democratic. The Republican Party doesn't have superdelegates and if they did they would have thrown Donald Trump under the bus and gave us their stuffed suit. As far as Trump being involved with the Russians the Mueller investigation hasn't proved anything nor will it ever prove anything. It's laughable. Trump like Bernie was an independent candidate who rode on a major party to win the presidency. Bernie could have beat Trump. It would have been close but the Democrat Party self-destructed pulling the Hillary trick. The Republican establishment sure as hell didn't want Trump or any non-establishment candidate to win. Why? All the corruption they all are involved in. As long as you get someone like Hillary or George W Bush in nobody goes to jail. This is the real issue. Let's say Bernie was a true outsider. He would be putting up with the same shit. Especially if he was about cleaning up the Department of Justice and the FBI. Oh man they would be pointing to his honeymoon in the Soviet Union and calling him a Russian double agent and all that shit. It's not who's president as much as who the president works for. If he works for the American people the establishment in Washington are really going to hate them. Lefty or Righty.

The Republican Party primary system is actually as rigged as the corporate "Democrats", they just use a different method. In several of the "red" states, the Republican party has a "winner takes all the delegates" policy, regardless of how many of the votes the candidate actually got. In the 2016 primary, the Republicans started out with a fully loaded clown car with 18 or so candidates in it. Cheeto actually didn't win a true majority (50% or better) in any primary until New York, which was about halfway through the cycle. Most of his early wins averaged 30% of the vote, sometimes even less. But he took all the delegates in those states.

Now if I were a Republican voter in a state where Cheeto had 32% of the votes and the guy I voted for had 31.5% (say, Kasich or Cruz, for example, since they were the guys who usually took 2nd or 3rd), I would be pissed off at Cheeto getting 100% of the delegates, despite getting less than 1/3 of the vote.

So a different system than the stupidelegates, but just as artificial, as far as reflecting the will of the actual primary voters.

The Republican Party primary system is actually as rigged as the corporate "Democrats", they just use a different method. In several of the "red" states, the Republican party has a "winner takes all the delegates" policy, regardless of how many of the votes the candidate actually got. In the 2016 primary, the Republicans started out with a fully loaded clown car with 18 or so candidates in it. Cheeto actually didn't win a true majority (50% or better) in any primary until New York, which was about halfway through the cycle. Most of his early wins averaged 30% of the vote, sometimes even less. But he took all the delegates in those states.

Now if I were a Republican voter in a state where Cheeto had 32% of the votes and the guy I voted for had 31.5% (say, Kasich or Cruz, for example, since they were the guys who usually took 2nd or 3rd), I would be pissed off at Cheeto getting 100% of the delegates, despite getting less than 1/3 of the vote.

So a different system than the stupidelegates, but just as artificial, as far as reflecting the will of the actual primary voters.

I really hate party politics. I would rather just see individuals run. Political parties make voting like sports. People tend to vote for the team rather than who is actually best suited for the job. It's the way the game has been played though. I guess it's human nature to do it this way.

What probably hurt the Democratic Party more than anything was using superdelegates to throw Bernie under the bus and give the nomination to Hillary. Notice Hillary won't go away either. It just proved the Democratic Party isn't so Democratic. The Republican Party doesn't have superdelegates and if they did they would have thrown Donald Trump under the bus and gave us their stuffed suit. As far as Trump being involved with the Russians the Mueller investigation hasn't proved anything nor will it ever prove anything. It's laughable. Trump like Bernie was an independent candidate who rode on a major party to win the presidency. Bernie could have beat Trump. It would have been close but the Democrat Party self-destructed pulling the Hillary trick. The Republican establishment sure as hell didn't want Trump or any non-establishment candidate to win. Why? All the corruption they all are involved in. As long as you get someone like Hillary or George W Bush in nobody goes to jail. This is the real issue. Let's say Bernie was a true outsider. He would be putting up with the same shit. Especially if he was about cleaning up the Department of Justice and the FBI. Oh man they would be pointing to his honeymoon in the Soviet Union and calling him a Russian double agent and all that shit. It's not who's president as much as who the president works for. If he works for the American people the establishment in Washington are really going to hate them. Lefty or Righty.

I think if Bernie had declared a few months sooner than he had, which would have given him a bit more time to catch fire in terms of his rallies and the amount of people he was reaching (considering mainstream tv news outlets were giving him a minimal amount of coverage - and the coverage he did get was mostly dismissive in terms of him being a pie in the sky candidate - and his campaign had to rely much more on grass roots outreach - word of mouth via rallies and internet - than Clinton's did by virtue of her being the preferred candidate of the media and the Democratic Party), he could have possibly overtaken Hillary in the primaries.

As it played out, even if there hadn't been clear bias on behalf of the DNC, I tend to think Hillary still probably would have edged him out in the primaries even if she hadn't benefitted from the media bias and the DNC rigging. Also, to be clear, there was no way in practical terms that the DNC wasn't going to do everything it could to make sure Hillary was the candidate. There was no way the DNC was going to surrender to Sanders without resistance and allow Sanders to take control of the party: he would have been beholden to virtually none of the professional demo players in the party had he won, and these same players were convinced (despite polling taken during the primaries to the contrary) that Bernie would be a sure loser in the fall.

Mind you, none of that means I don't agree that the theoretical purpose of the DNC re: primaries is to ensure all the candidates on the ballot have equal access to the machinery of the party during the primaries, and that the DNC members/superdelegates have a responsibility to determine which candidate is the strongest for the general election (as opposed to which one they would LIKE to run in the general). However, we all know the world doesn't work that way. Hillary, above all else, thought her candidacy and the Presidency (much like her Senate seat and her Cabinet position) were owed to her because:

a) She stood by her husband during his sex scandal

b) She felt she should be the first woman president

c) She didn't try to divide the convention in 2008 via her endorsement of Obama

And the majority of the DNC agreed with all of that.

The majority of the Republican Party establishment were shitting their pants as 2015 rolled into 2016 and none of the boilerplate hack candidates could put Trump away. Doubtless shitting their pants because much like Trump himself they thought he would never win, and even if Trump DID win he wasn't beholden to the GOP Establishment. Same deal as Sanders and the Dems.

And I'd have to imagine now that the centrist, middle of the road operatives of both parties are feeling like they have a very feeble grip on their parties going forward, considering how close Sanders came running far to the left of Hillary and Trump going out and whipping up massive crowds just flat-out SAYING the things he did that other GOP candidates would only dog-whistle in code.

In the end, though, these same middle of the road operatives don't really give a shit if their candidates win or lose, because these operatives for the most part only pay lip service to the ideals of conservatism and liberalism: it's the campaign cash, pork barrel dough and consulting fees that motivate them. While doubtless it would be preferred if the candidates they work for win their elections, there are plenty of ways for operatives to make money even when their party loses.

As to Mueller, while the optics, facts and text of what we know regarding Trump's various campaign operatives and their meetings/connections with various Russian actors have been established - and there's just too much of it for a reasonable person to think it was all coincidental - actually PROVING the Russian operatives were taking direct orders from Putin or the Kremlin to specifically collude with Trump campaign staff in order to deny Clinton victory...I tend to doubt there's going to be smoking gun-type memo spelling out "The Plan"...and short of several of Trump's campaign advisors going on the record and saying "yes, it did in fact happen and it happened as the result of intentional planning, and Trump in fact knew about it beforehand" all you will have is circumstantial evidence. That type of evidence regularly convicts lesser citizens of crimes, but the standard (one would hope) for removing a President from office is a bit higher than that.

The best shot Mueller has is to get Trump under oath. Trump lies with the same ease in which he breathes, so Trump's only chance of not opening himself up to perjury charges is to plead the 5th or refuse the subpoena: while doubtless Trump believes he can obfuscate a Mueller line of inquiry in the same manner as his testimonies in the many civil suits against him attempted to, were I one of Trump's legal team now I'd just tell him to take the 5th. Much easier to take the 5th/refuse to testify and then go on to tweet that he did so because it was all a "witch hunt" than to lie. And we ALL know Trump lies. And lies. And, even when the truth would suffice, Trump STILL lies. The Mueller inquiry isn't some civil suit like the Trump University sham where Donald can throw $25 million at it and ultimately make it go away after the con was exposed.

Having said all that, I'll be surprised if the Mueller investigation ultimately results in Trump being impeached, let alone removed from office.

A large amount of the Republicans would have been fine with Hillary as president. Look. It's not about politics. It's about staying out of jail. There are so many crooks in the government on both sides of the isle nothing scares the shit out of them more than an outsider winning the presidency. That can be a liberal like Bernie or more of a conservative like Trump. Doesn't matter who it is but if they think there is a chance they might go to jail the establishment will do anything to remove that president. Mueller is a crook. End of story. He has nothing to lose so he's pulled out all the stops. Him and Comey are worth millions of dollars and they didn't make that by obeying the law. The investigation is going to fizzle and who knows we might see Mueller running off to a non-extradition country. Maybe the drug lords he turned a blind eye towards will do him a favor. They fight and then they run.

Haha! Even Louis Farrakhan knows The Department of Justice is the Department of Just Us. The politicians and bureaucrats can rob and steal with impunity but a citizen can go to jail in a heartbeat. I wasn't expecting Trump to fix much if anything but I knew he would stir the pot and the pot needs stirring. Bring all the swamp muck up for everyone to smell and see.

I really hate party politics. I would rather just see individuals run. Political parties make voting like sports. People tend to vote for the team rather than who is actually best suited for the job. It's the way the game has been played though. I guess it's human nature to do it this way.

As I understand it the US system was meant to not have party politics when it was being designed.

The problem now is that like the UK system there is no way in a million years anyone would choose to copy either if you were starting with a clean slate. It's completely ridiculous to try and reflect the wishes of 300 million people in the 21st century using a 2 party system.

Mueller is a crook. End of story. He has nothing to lose so he's pulled out all the stops. Him and Comey are worth millions of dollars and they didn't make that by obeying the law. The investigation is going to fizzle and who knows we might see Mueller running off to a non-extradition country. Maybe the drug lords he turned a blind eye towards will do him a favor. They fight and then they run.

What?

How is Mueller a crook?

I know American State TV (Fox) is running a propaganda campaign against him now but please explain the evidence for that I had only heard that from the crazees in the past?

As I understand it the US system was meant to not have party politics when it was being designed.

The problem now is that like the UK system there is no way in a million years anyone would choose to copy either if you were starting with a clean slate. It's completely ridiculous to try and reflect the wishes of 300 million people in the 21st century using a 2 party system.

Do we even need a congress anymore? They really just do nothing and cost us a lot of money. We could do electronic voting from the state level. The states were supposed to have most the power. All the federal government was supposed to do was represent the states internationally. Protect the states. Provide a supreme court to go to if something was deemed unconstitutional. The problem is states don't mint their own money and since the federal government has a non-ending line of credit in the world's reserve currency, it can own the states since most of them depend on federal funding and have nothing to really fight back with. It wasn't an accident that someone made the capitol dome in Washington look like a big nipple. The whole country sucks off of it.

If Obama Had Met with Kim Jong Un, the Republican Party Would Have Had a Cow

If Obama Had Met with Kim Jong Un, the Republican Party Would Have Had a Cow

by Juan Cole

The depths of hypocrisy of the Republican Party in supporting Trump’s meeting with the North Korean dictator in Singapore are hard to plumb. This is a party whose leading members adopted the Ostrich Foreign Policy Principle for decades. If you don’t like a country’s government or political and economic system, pretend it does not exist.

One of the concerning developments on the internet is that hypocrisy, which was probably the ultimate Cool Meme in the zeroes of this century, no longer rules. Maybe it is just scandal fatigue from the combination of profound corruption and attention deficit disorder characterizing Washington under Trump. But, well, we have to keep on slogging.

There was that time when Sen. Ted Cruz and other Republicans lambasted Obama for visiting Cuba while there were still political prisoners in that country. So the principle is, no talks with leaders who have prisoners of conscience in their jails? Trump has broken that principle every which way from Sunday. Sen. John McCain even compared Obama’s handshake with Castro to the Hitler-Chamberlain meeting. Seriously. That’s what he said.

Then there was that time when prominent Republicans slammed Barack Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry for his direct talks with Iran’s foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. Sen. John Barrasso, R-WY and a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said, “I have a lot of concerns about Secretary John Kerry and his buddy-buddy relationship with Zarif and other people around the world.”

In 2008 when Obama was still running for president, one of his foreign policy advisers, Daniel Kurtzer, went to Damascus and met with Bashar al-Assad’s foreign minister. Sen. John McCain slammed Obama for the overture to the al-Assad regime: “If one of Senator Obama’s advisers has been to Damascus, we just wonder how many have been to Tehran.”

And, of course, when Barack Obama was running for president in 2008 and pledged unconditional talks with North Korea among other countries, he was pilloried by conservatives – the same ones who now demand a Nobel Peace Prize for Trump for meeting with the North Korean president without preconditions.

If Obama Had Met with Kim Jong Un, the Republican Party Would Have Had a Cow

by Juan Cole

The depths of hypocrisy of the Republican Party in supporting Trump’s meeting with the North Korean dictator in Singapore are hard to plumb. This is a party whose leading members adopted the Ostrich Foreign Policy Principle for decades. If you don’t like a country’s government or political and economic system, pretend it does not exist.

One of the concerning developments on the internet is that hypocrisy, which was probably the ultimate Cool Meme in the zeroes of this century, no longer rules. Maybe it is just scandal fatigue from the combination of profound corruption and attention deficit disorder characterizing Washington under Trump. But, well, we have to keep on slogging.

There was that time when Sen. Ted Cruz and other Republicans lambasted Obama for visiting Cuba while there were still political prisoners in that country. So the principle is, no talks with leaders who have prisoners of conscience in their jails? Trump has broken that principle every which way from Sunday. Sen. John McCain even compared Obama’s handshake with Castro to the Hitler-Chamberlain meeting. Seriously. That’s what he said.

Then there was that time when prominent Republicans slammed Barack Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry for his direct talks with Iran’s foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. Sen. John Barrasso, R-WY and a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said, “I have a lot of concerns about Secretary John Kerry and his buddy-buddy relationship with Zarif and other people around the world.”

In 2008 when Obama was still running for president, one of his foreign policy advisers, Daniel Kurtzer, went to Damascus and met with Bashar al-Assad’s foreign minister. Sen. John McCain slammed Obama for the overture to the al-Assad regime: “If one of Senator Obama’s advisers has been to Damascus, we just wonder how many have been to Tehran.”

And, of course, when Barack Obama was running for president in 2008 and pledged unconditional talks with North Korea among other countries, he was pilloried by conservatives – the same ones who now demand a Nobel Peace Prize for Trump for meeting with the North Korean president without preconditions.

It's partisan politics. Yup. Many Republicans would be saying Obama is hanging with his communist comrades plotting on how to screw America and make it communist like North Korea. The problem is Obama might have carpetbagged out of Chicago but he didn't play for the Bulls. Kim only wants to talk to NBA superstars if you are black and Obama was no Dennis Rodman.

Trump Insists Parents of Fallen Korean War Soldiers Begged Him to Bring Sons Home

President Donald Trump made the rather ridiculous claim that parents of fallen Korean War soldiers came up to him on the campaign trail and begged for their sons’ remains to be brought home.

Yet, here is the thing. The math is not exactly in his favor.

The Korean War ended in 1953. While they technically could still be alive, it is unlikely that they are attending a campaign event calling for the return of their sons’ bodies.

There is also the problem that according to Trump’s account, it is not just one very elderly parent of a Korean war veteran, but more than one, as evidenced by use of the word “we.”

“When you can, president, we’d love our son to be brought back home — you know, the remains,” he recalled them saying, despite the fact he just said he was on the campaign trail and not POTUS yet.

The comment did not go unnoticed by media Twitter who noted Trump’s claims simply did not add up.

Yet, perhaps not surprisingly, Fox News found a way to try to make Trump right, bringing on family members — not parents — of Korean War vets who were, indeed, happy at the idea of seeing their loved ones remains back home.

Oh but if a Democrat met with Kim and everything stayed the same it would be great. You guys are sounding like warmongering Republicans.

Yeah and I thought they were all about diplomacy. Apparently Trump was supposed to call Kim a lunatic scumbag murderous dictator, have a lunch meeting, and hope he didn't kill any peace deal. Which, btw, the libs
kept saying all last month that Trump was going to kill any hopes of peace deal. Sounds psychotic to me.